Armed Forces: DDA Exemption

Lord Morris of Manchester: To ask Her Majesty's Government further to the comments by Lord McKenzie of Luton in Grand Committee on 28 April (Official Report, House of Lords, cols. GC44-5), what is the justification for the breadth of the exemption of the Armed Forces from the Disability Discrimination Act 1995; and whether they have now reconsidered it.
	To ask Her Majesty's Government why they plan to maintain the exemption of Armed Forces personnel from the Disability Discrimination Act as a proportionate means of ensuring combat effectiveness.
	To ask Her Majesty's Government whether it is their policy that Armed Forces personnel should be treated differently with regard to the Disability Discrimination Act from police and fire services personnel.
	To ask Her Majesty's Government whether they will propose an amendment to the Equality Bill to remove the exemption from the Disability Discrimination Act of Armed Forces personnel.

Baroness Taylor of Bolton: The Armed Forces have an exemption from the employment provisions of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 (DDA) because all service personnel need to be combat effective in order to meet a worldwide liability to deploy. This means that everyone who joins the Armed Forces undergoes a rigorous selection and initial training process to ensure that they can withstand the hardship and challenges of military service.
	The Armed Forces do not allow units to have a protected role or reduced commitment, which means that everyone is liable to deploy and to fight anywhere in the world, even if only in self-defence. Accordingly, the MoD has concluded that it is essential that exemptions from domestic and international disability legislation are retained. For this reason the Armed Forces' exemption from the DDA has been replicated in the Equality Bill. This is required to ensure the continued combat effectiveness of the Armed Forces, as decisions on operational effectiveness must be taken by MoD Ministers, accountable to Parliament and based on military advice, not by the courts. The Armed Forces must be able to determine and set their own standards, based on the tasks to be performed. The Government do not expect the rationale for the exemption from the DDA to change, hence there are no plans to remove this exemption.
	The Armed Forces perform a role which is fundamentally different from those of other organisations, such as the police and the fire services. All service personnel are weapons-trained and need to be able to respond to the uniquely harsh realities and complexities of warfare. This involves deployment overseas and prolonged working in stressful situations and arduous environments. Service in the police and the fire services is intrinsically different, not least because there is no requirement for everyone to be weapons-trained, or to serve overseas for prolonged periods. The Government do not consider that a direct comparison can be drawn between service in such disparate organisations.

Banking

Viscount Waverley: To ask Her Majesty's Government whether they are considering whether to permit banks to raise the value of their assets above market conditions in order to increase their net worth.

Lord Myners: The Government expect banks to value the assets on their balance sheet in accordance with industry and international best practice, the relevant accounting rules and financial regulations. The Chancellor of the Exchequer announced on 19 January that banks joining the asset protection scheme would have to implement the highest international standards of public disclosure in relation to their assets. Further detailed information about the assets in the scheme will be provided after the final contracts are signed.

Banking

Lord Laird: To ask Her Majesty's Government further to the Written Answer by Lord Myners on 27 April (WA 1) concerning discussion with the government of the Republic of Ireland, when the practice was introduced not to provide details of all meetings of Treasury Ministers and officials; by whom; and why.

Lord Myners: It is a long-standing practice that the Government do not normally publish details of the meetings of UK Ministers and officials with their counterparts in other Governments, as to do so might prejudice free and frank discussions.

British Citizenship

Lord Avebury: To ask Her Majesty's Government whether they will amend the paragraph on the UK Border Agency website page www.bia.homeoffice.gov.uk/britishcitizenship/eligibility/registration/britishmother headed "Children of British mothers—proposed changes", to explain the provisions of clause 46 of the Borders, Citizenship and Immigration Bill affecting the child born abroad to a British mother before 7 February 1961, giving the persons concerned advance notice of their right to register as a British citizen when Part 2 of the Bill comes into effect.

Lord West of Spithead: An announcement anticipating this change has been on the UKBA website since 16 July 2008. We are in the process of updating this to reflect the current progress of the Bill.

British Coal Compensation

Lord Lofthouse of Pontefract: To ask Her Majesty's Government further to the Written Answer by Lord Hunt of Kings Heath on 3 March (WA 150) concerning the payment of £40.5 million to Avalon Solicitors in the British Coal litigation, what assessment they have made of (a) the sentence of the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal on 29 April striking-off from the Roll of Solicitors that firm's former senior partner, Andrew Nulty; (b) the tribunal's finding that Mr Nulty's conduct had been "a disgrace to the profession"; and (c) the tribunal's finding that Mr Nulty's written response to a Minister of the Crown in the British Coal litigation had been intended to deceive and was dishonest; and whether, having regard to such matters, the payment of £40.5 million to Avalon Solicitors is to be referred to the Serious Fraud Office and South Yorkshire Police in connection with their ongoing investigation into the British Coal Litigation.

Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: The department has not made any such assessment to date. The department will consider the matter further when the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal's written ruling in respect of the case against Avalon is published.

British Coal Compensation

Lord Lofthouse of Pontefract: To ask Her Majesty's Government what is the current total amount of costs paid to solicitors representing claimants under the claims handling agreement, British Coal vibration white finger litigation.

Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: The total costs for claimants' solicitors handling claims under the vibration white finger scheme is £187.14 million (includes Solicitors Co-ordinating Group, UDM and Vendside Ltd) as at 31 March 2009.

British Coal Compensation

Lord Lofthouse of Pontefract: To ask Her Majesty's Government whether closing dates for the schemes under the British Coal respiratory disease litigation and British Coal vibration white finger litigation have been extended; and, if so, what are the new closing dates proposed for each such scheme.

Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD)—The closing date to register claims under the COPD scheme was 31 March 2004.
	The total number of claims received under the COPD scheme is 592,000. An aspirational scheme completion date was set for 16 February 2009 over four years ago. In agreement with the court overseeing the COPD scheme in March 2009 the target is now to reduce claims down to 2000 by 30 November 2009 with the aim to resolve the remaining claims by end 2010.
	Vibration White Finger (VWF)—Vibration white finger was closed to new application in October 2002 for live claims and January 2003 for posthumous claims.
	The total number of claims received under the vibration white finger (VWF) scheme is 170,000. As at end of March 2009, over 169,000 claims have been settled. The VWF litigation concluded on 1 May 2009. The department expects to have settled the remaining 535 VWF claims by end 2009.

British Coal Compensation

Lord Lofthouse of Pontefract: To ask Her Majesty's Government how many pro formas have been sent out by solicitors in the British Coal respiratory disease litigation and British Coal vibration white finger litigation to advise former clients of the position in respect of third party funding arrangements; and whether they have made any assessment of the accuracy of the information provided.

Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: I understand the Legal Complaints Service (LCS) has entered into agreement with some solicitor firms on the basis that the firms write to the clients they represented in the chronic obstructive pulmonary disease or vibration white finger schemes providing information on the issue of deductions and the right of the clients to request repayment of any inappropriate deduction(s). Therefore, this is a matter for the LCS and the solicitors involved.
	I am keeping in touch with the LCS on the progress of this initiative.

Common Land

Lord Greaves: To ask Her Majesty's Government which applications for restricted works on common land have been made under Section 38 of the Commons Act 2006; and what was the outcome in each case.

Baroness Andrews: Fifty-nine applications have been made under Section 38, of which 29 have been decided; details are given in the following table:
	
		
			 Name of common [and County] Date application received Decision 
			 Redbourn Common, Hertfordshire 19 November 2007 Granted 
			 Rishworth Moor Common, West Yorkshire 21 November 2007 Granted 
			 Houndwell Park (Spark Park), Hampshire 27 November 2007 Granted 
			 Crosscannonby Foreshore, Cumbria 20 December 2007 Granted 
			 Tiptree Heath Common, Essex 4 January 2008 Granted 
			 Lately Common, Cheshire 7 January 2008 Granted 
			 The Village Green Common, North Yorkshire 18 February 2008 Granted 
			 Bowscale Common, Cumbria 20 February 2008 Granted 
			 Mungrisdale Common, Cumbria 20 February 2008 Granted 
			 Saddleback Common, Cumbria 20 February 2008 Granted 
			 Hargill Common, North Yorkshire 26 February 2008 Granted 
			 Walney Island (South), Cumbria 29 February 2008 Granted 
			 The Green Common, Buckinghamshire 3 March 2008 Granted 
			 Llynclys Hill Common, Shropshire 4 April 2008 Granted 
			 Gembling Common, East Yorkshire 14 May 2008 Granted 
			 Broad Street Common, Surrey 11 June 2008 Pending 
			 Shalford Common, Surrey 13 June 2008 Granted 
			 The Moors, Shropshire 27 June 2008 Granted 
			 Crownhill Down, Devon 4 July 2008 Granted 
			 Chilgrove Common, West Sussex 16 July 2008 Pending 
			 Curtismill and Wattons Green, Essex 28 July 2008 Granted 
			 Common land at Portland, Dorset 18 August 2008 Granted 
			 Redhill and Earlswood Commons, Surrey 3 September 2008 Granted 
			 Pickhurst Green Common, Bromley 2 October 2008 Pending 
			 The Lees, Kent 14 October 2008 Granted 
			 Roadside Waste, Borehamwood, Hertfordshire 17 October 2008 Granted 
			 Little Warley Common, Essex 27 October 2008 Granted 
			 Blackheath Common, Surrey 3 November 2008 Pending 
			 Thornage Common, Norfolk 10 November 2008 Granted 
			 The Green, Norfolk 12 November 2008 Granted 
			 Hayes Common, Bromley 18 November 2008 Pending 
			 Hartlebury Common, Worcestershire 19 November 2008 Pending 
			 Lydlinch Common, Dorset 20 November 2008 Pending 
			 Withycombe Raleigh Common, Devon 21 November 2008 Pending 
			 Arkengarthdale Common, North Yorkshire 15 December 2008 Granted 
			 Shaugh Prior Common, Devon 23 December 2008 Granted 
			 Cinder Hill, East Sussex 31 December 2008 Pending 
			 Great Common, Suffolk 2 January 2009 Pending 
			 Marley Common, West Sussex 7 January 2009 Pending 
			 Prees Heath, Shropshire 8 January 2009 Pending 
			 Englefield Green, Surrey 14 January 2009 Pending 
			 Chesham Moor Common, Buckinghamshire 4 February 2009 Pending 
			 Westfield Common, Surrey 9 February 2009 Granted 
			 Alderford Common, Norfolk 9 February 2009 Pending 
			 Swannington Upgate Common, Norfolk 9 February 2009 Pending 
			 Clee Liberty Common, Shropshire 9 February 2009 Pending 
			 Therfield Heath, Hertfordshire 9 February 2009 Pending 
			 Yately Green, Hampshire 11 February 2009 Pending 
			 Wessington Green Common, Derbyshire 20 February 2009 Pending 
			 London Fields, Hackney 10 March 2009 Pending 
			 Bridgeyate Common, South Gloucestershire 19 March 2009 Pending 
			 Viscar Common, Cornwall 24 March 2009 Pending 
			 Aspull Common, Wigan 26 March 2009 Pending 
			 Hapton Common, Lancashire 14 April 2009 Pending 
			 Smithwood Common, Surrey 14 April 2009 Pending 
			 Sodbury Common, South Gloucestershire 20 April 2009 Pending 
			 Long Green and Spears Hill, Suffolk 20 April 2009 Pending 
			 Blackdown/West Blackdown Common, Devon 22 April 2009 Pending 
			 Thwaites Fell, Cumbria 24 April 2009 Pending

Common Land

Lord Greaves: To ask Her Majesty's Government which applications for deregistration of common land have been made under Section 16 of the Commons Act 2006 in relation to (1) commons, (2) village greens and (3) town greens; what was the outcome in each case; and in which cases replacement land was provided.

Baroness Andrews: Nine applications have been made under Section 16, of which six have been decided; details are given in the following table. Suitable replacement land was provided in every case where consent has been granted.
	
		
			 Name of common or green and county Date application received Decision 
			 (1) Commons   
			 Mill Green Common, Hampshire 7 November 2007 Granted 
			 Crowborough Common, East Sussex 7 May 2008 Refused 
			 Dartford Heath Common 16 June 2008 Granted 
			 Puxey Pond, Dorset 2 July 2008 Pending 
			 Gentleshaw Common, Staffordshire 1 September 2008 Granted 
			 (2) Village greens   
			 Kingston Beach, West Sussex 19 March 2008 Granted 
			 The Green, Barrington, Cambridgeshire 26 August 2008 Granted 
			 Barmby Moor, East Yorkshire 28 January 2009 Pending 
			 Easington Village Green, Durham 6 April 2009 Pending 
			 (3) Town greens   
			 None specifically designated as such on the application

Counterterrorism

Baroness Neville-Jones: To ask Her Majesty's Government how many counterterrorism security advisers have been trained by the National Counter-Terrorism Security Office in each year since 2001.
	To ask Her Majesty's Government how many counterterrorism security advisers are in each police force in the United Kingdom.
	To ask Her Majesty's Government how many police forces have completed assessments of local critical sites within their jurisdiction that might be vulnerable to terrorist or extremist attack.
	To ask Her Majesty's Government how much has been spent on (a) training, and (b) employing counterterrorism security advisers in each year since 2001.
	To ask Her Majesty's Government from which budget the extra £5 million of Government money announced by Lord West of Spithead on 20 April to enable councils and partnerships to put into practice the advice contained in Safer Places: a Counter-Terrorism Supplement will come; and how that money will be apportioned.

Lord West of Spithead: The £5 million funding comes from the Home Office budget for the Office for Security and Counter Terrorism (OSCT).This has been allocated as part of the budget-setting round for 2009-10 to support regional and local delivery of work in England and Wales to improve the protection of crowded places as set out in the Government's consultation document Working Together to Protect Crowded Places. The Government will allocate this funding based on priorities identified by local partnerships and risk assessments carried out by counterterrorism security advisers (CTSAs).
	Funding provided by the Home Office for counterterrorism security advisers (CTSAs) is paid directly to police authorities and was funded from the dedicated security post (DSP) grant in 2008-09 and previous years. The funding is a contribution towards the cost of employing, training and equipping police officers/police staff to fulfil the duties agreed between the police force and the Home Office. The funding since 2003-04 is as follows:
	2003-04—£2,508,000;2004-05—£4,984,000;2005-06—£6,061,163;2006-07—£5,952,800;2007-08—£5,970,763; and2008-09—£7,775,863.
	Information for 2001-02 and 2002-03 is not readily available.
	CTSAs in each police force in England and Wales have identified crowded places in their force areas and completed risk assessments using guidance jointly issued by the Home Office and the National Counter Terrorism Security Office.
	This process is nearly complete in Scotland and is still under way in Northern Ireland. CTSAs are advised of other critical sites within their force areas and provide protective security advice as appropriate. The number of counterterrorism security advisers trained by year and by police force is not held centrally.

Education: Sponsor Licence

Baroness Warsi: To ask Her Majesty's Government which colleges, schools and universities have been refused a sponsor licence by the UK Borders Agency.

Lord West of Spithead: Information pertaining to sponsor licence applications is held in confidence between the UK Border Agency and the institutions making the application. It would not be appropriate to disclose information relating to refusals to a third party.

Elections: Northern Ireland Constituencies

Lord Kilclooney: To ask Her Majesty's Government what was the electorate for the European elections in June 2004, and how many applications there were for postal votes, in each of the 18 Northern Ireland parliamentary constituencies.

Baroness Royall of Blaisdon: These are operational matters for the Chief Electoral Officer for Northern Ireland. Statistics about the June 2004 elections can be found on his website at www.eoni.org.uk/index/statistics/election-statistics/european-parliamentary-election-2004.htm.
	The noble Lord may wish to write to the chief electoral officer directly with any further queries.

Elections: Northern Ireland Constituencies

Lord Kilclooney: To ask Her Majesty's Government what is the present electorate in each of the 18 Northern Ireland parliamentary constituencies.

Baroness Royall of Blaisdon: The Chief Electoral Officer for Northern Ireland is responsible for maintaining the electoral register in Northern Ireland. Statistics about the size of the electorate can be found on his website at www.eoni.org.uk/index/statistics/electorate-statistics.htm.
	The noble Lord may wish to write to him directly with any further queries.

Elections: Northern Ireland Constituencies

Lord Kilclooney: To ask Her Majesty's Government whether notices for postal vote applications for the June 2009 European elections were advertised in the (a) Down Recorder, (b) Down Democrat, (c) Mourne Observer, (d) Tyrone Courier, (e) Tyrone Times, (f) Dungannon Observer, (g) Ballymena Guardian, and (h) Ballymena Times.

Baroness Royall of Blaisdon: The Electoral Commission is responsible for promoting public awareness of election matters across the United Kingdom, including with regard to notices in relation to postal vote applications. The noble Lord may wish to write to the commission directly.

Energy: Renewables

Lord Vinson: To ask Her Majesty's Government what is the contracted standing charge per year by 2020 that will fall on all electricity consumers in order to recover the cost of subsidising generation and transmission of renewable energy technologies; and how much that is per British household.

Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: The projected cost of the RO (including the measures banding the RO in the Renewables Obligation Order 2009) on electricity prices is £6.5/MWh in 2020. This represents an increase in the average annual electricity bills of around £21 in 2020.
	In the renewable energy strategy consultation the Government set out the impact of meeting the UK's share of the EU renewable energy target. Table 10.1 shows the impact on electricity bills to be 9 to 15 per cent higher between 2020 and 2024, an increase in average domestic bills of between £32 and £53 per year. Estimates will be updated in the renewable energy strategy to be published in the summer.

Equalities Targets

Lord Ouseley: To ask Her Majesty's Government whether, following the budget statement, there is justification for maintaining equalities targets; and whether they will propose savings by abolishing the Government Equalities Office and the Equality and Human Rights Commission and revoking all equalities legislation.

Lord Myners: The Government are committed to the equalities agenda. They have no plans to abolish the Government Equalities Office (GEO) or the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC), or revoke equalities legislation.

Foster Care

Lord Sheikh: To ask Her Majesty's Government what steps they are taking to increase the number of foster carers in the United Kingdom.

Baroness Morgan of Drefelin: By improving the training, support and development of foster carers our Care Matters agenda should help to equip foster carers with the skills they need, and in doing so aid recruitment and retention of foster carers.
	We have also provided a grant of £82,000 in 2009-10 to support the Fostering Network's foster carer recruitment event—Foster Care Fortnight—which launched on 11 May. We will continue to work with stakeholders to determine what more the Government can do to support local recruitment of foster carers.

Foster Care

Lord Sheikh: To ask Her Majesty's Government what steps they are taking to ensure that foster carers receive monetary allowances that are commensurate with their duties.

Baroness Morgan of Drefelin: All foster carers receive an allowance from their fostering service provider to meet the costs of caring for children placed with them. The Government introduced a national minimum allowance in 2007. A Fostering Network survey conducted in October 2008 showed that all but nine fostering service providers are paying their carers at least the national minimum allowance. A further six providers have subsequently confirmed that they would pay their carers at least the national minimum allowance from April 2009.
	Over and above this minimum, it is for fostering service providers to determine their payments in light of their particular circumstances. We will be expecting providers to publish details of the way in which their payment systems are structured so that this is transparent to carers.

Government Departments: Staff Absence

Baroness Warsi: To ask Her Majesty's Government what the rates of staff (a) absence, and (b) sickness absence, were at (1) the Department for Communities and Local Government, and (2) each of its agencies and non-departmental public bodies, in each of the past three years; and what the targets for the department were in each case.

Baroness Andrews: Information on sickness absence for 2004, 2005 and 2006-07 for the Department for Communities and Local Government or its predecessor, the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister (ODPM), can be found on the Civil Service website at www.civilservice.gov.uk/about/who/statistics/sickness.aspx.
	From January 2008, information on sickness absence has been provided by departments and collated by the Cabinet Office on a quarterly basis. Sickness absence data for the Department for Communities and Local Government are aggregated with those for its executive agencies but data are not collected for its NDPBs. In the 12 months to 31 December 2008, the average working days lost per employee in the Department for Communities and Local Government were 6.3.
	Targets for sickness absence have not been set by the department and neither does it collect information on absence other than that which is sickness-related.

Government Departments: Staff Absence

Baroness Warsi: To ask Her Majesty's Government what the rates of staff (a) absence, and (b) sickness absence, were at (1) the Home Office, and (2) each of its agencies and non-departmental public bodies, in the past three years; and what the target rates set for the department were in each case.

Lord West of Spithead: (a) Staff absence in Home Office HQ and its agencies—Members of staff might be absent from work for a variety of reasons (other than sickness absence), such as annual leave, flexi leave, maternity, paternity or adoption leave, or special leave. No central record is kept of the totality of these absences and the information requested could only be obtained at disproportionate cost.
	(b) Sickness absence in Home Office HQ and its agencies—Table 1 provides the rate of sickness absence for Home Office HQ and its agencies in 2006-07, 2007-08 and 2008-09. We do not hold data for non-departmental public bodies.
	Sickness absence target rates for Home Office HQ and UKBA—Targets for the reduction of sickness absence levels in Home Office HQ and UKBA were set out in the Home Office reform action plan, published in July 2006. The published targets were: a reduction to an average seven working days lost per person per year by 2008 and to an average six working days lost per person per year by 2010. This target is currently being reviewed in the light of recent developments in the department, including the introduction of a new sickness absence policy and improved data collection procedures.
	Identity and Passport Service—Targets for the reduction of sickness absence levels in the Identity and Passport Service have been published regularly in the IPS annual report and business plan. The targets for 2007, 2008 and 2009 were 10.5 average working days lost per staff year.
	Criminal Records Bureau—Targets for the reduction of sickness absence levels in the Criminal Records Bureau have been published regularly in the CRB. business plan. The 2006-07 business plan stated a target of less than 11 days annually. The 2007-08 and 2008-09 business plan stated a target of 10 days annually.
	
		
			 Table 1 Footnote 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 
			  1 AWDL RY AWDL RY AWDL RY 
			 Home Office Headquarters 2 7.80 6.60 5.50 
			 Agencies: 
			 UK Border Agency 3  11.20 9.70 
			 Identity and Passport Service  10.10 11.70 9.59 
			 Criminal Records Bureau  9.30 12.30 11.31 
			 The Prison Service 4 12.00   
			 Home Office Total   10.70 9.34 
		
	
	Footnotes
	1 Data for 2006-07 have been taken from the Cabinet Office publication Analysis of Sick Absence in the Civil Service FY2006-07. Data for 2007-08 have been taken from the April 2007-31 March 2008 Quarter 4 Cabinet Office return produced for the Permanent Secretaries Management Group. Data for 2008-09 use Data View, the new single source for all Home Office HR data. Data View uses data extracted as soon as possible after the last day of the calendar month from the Home Office's four employee records systems: Adelphi for Headquarters and the UK Border Agency (UKBA); Snowdrop for the Identity and Passport Service (IPS); IRIS for the Criminal Records Bureau; and ePayFact for pay and pensions purposes. UKVisas (previously FCO) and HMRC Detection staff who have transferred to the UKBA will be added during 2009-10 as part of an ongoing improvement programme. Data from 2006-07 and 2007-08 did not use the Office of National Statistics definitions for headcount reporting, and did not comply with latest guidance for the correct reporting of sick absence issued by Cabinet Office. All data for 31 March 2009 (2008-09) fully comply with Office of National Statistics and Cabinet Office standards, definitions, and reporting.
	2 Headquarters figure for 2006-07 included the Immigration and Nationality Directorate (IND), which later became the UK Border Agency.
	3 The Immigration and Nationality Directorate became the Border and Immigration Agency (a shadow agency of the Home Department) in May 2007, later renamed the UK Border Agency from 2007-08.
	4 The Prison Service joined the Ministry of Justice as part of the machinery of government changes in May 2007—see Home Office departmental report 2008 Cm 7396 p. 104.

Government Departments: Staff Absence

Baroness Warsi: To ask Her Majesty's Government what the rates of staff (a) absence, and (b) sickness absence, were at (1) the Department for Children, Schools and Families, and (2) each of its agencies and non-departmental public bodies, in each of the past three years; and what the targets for the department were in each case.

Baroness Morgan of Drefelin: The department reports on targets for sickness absence, including the average number of days, on its website at www.dcsf.gov.uk/sicknessabsence/.
	The department is committed to managing sickness absence effectively and is on target to reduce sickness absence to meet Cabinet Office targets, with an aim of reducing sickness absence to seven days per full-time staff member by 2010.
	The department does not report against any absence targets other than sickness absence.
	All non-departmental public bodies for which the Department for Children, Schools and Families has responsibility have their own systems, and information is not kept centrally and could only be established at disproportionate costs.
	The department has no agencies.

Houses of Parliament: Select Committees

Lord Lester of Herne Hill: To ask Her Majesty's Government further to the Written Answer by the Lord President (Baroness Royall of Blaisdon) on 20 April (WA 346), on how many occasions and in what circumstances Ministers of HM Treasury have refused to give evidence to Parliamentary Select Committees during the past five years.

Lord Myners: The information requested is not readily available.

Houses of Parliament: Select Committees

Lord Lester of Herne Hill: To ask Her Majesty's Government further to the Written Answer by the Lord President (Baroness Royall of Blaisdon) on 20 April (WA 346), on how many occasions and in what circumstances Ministers of the Scotland Office have refused to give evidence to Parliamentary Select Committees during the past five years.

Lord Davidson of Glen Clova: I am not aware of any occasion during the past five years when a Scotland Office Minister has refused to give evidence to a parliamentary Select Committee.

Houses of Parliament: Select Committees

Lord Lester of Herne Hill: To ask Her Majesty's Government further to the Written Answer by the Lord President (Baroness Royall of Blaisdon) on 20 April (WA 346), on how many occasions and in what circumstances Ministers of the Department for Transport have refused to give evidence to Parliamentary Select Committees during the past five years.

Lord Adonis: In the past five years there have been no occasions when Ministers from the Department for Transport have refused to give evidence to parliamentary Select Committees.

Houses of Parliament: Select Committees

Lord Lester of Herne Hill: To ask the Leader of the House further to her Written Answer on 20 April (WA 346), on how many occasions and in what circumstances she and her predecessors have refused to give evidence to Parliamentary Select Committees during the past five years.

Baroness Royall of Blaisdon: I am not aware of any occasion in the period when a Leader of the House has refused to give evidence to a Select Committee of either House.

Housing: Valuations

Baroness Warsi: To ask Her Majesty's Government what factors are taken into account by the Valuation Office Agency when deciding whether to allocate a dwelling with a GG (garden—where not usual) value significant code; and whether they will place the agency's guidance on the issue in the Library of the House.

Lord Myners: The value significant code GG may be present where a property has a garden when similar properties in the vicinity do not, and it is believed the garden's existence is likely to affect the value of a property. An example would be a flat or a mews-style property with a garden in a location where neighbouring properties have no such facility. The Valuation Office Agency does not provide specific guidance to its staff on when to use the code—it is a matter of local knowledge and judgment. General guidance on the use of all its dwelling-house codes is published on the VOA's website at www.voa.gov.uk/publications/dwellinghousecodingguide/files/contents.htm.

Kenya

The Earl of Sandwich: To ask Her Majesty's Government what steps they are taking to consolidate the 2008 power-sharing agreement in Kenya and to encourage the government of Kenya to follow up the recommendations of the Waki Commission.

Lord Malloch-Brown: The Government have made clear their support for the Kenyan coalition Government. We have encouraged both sides of the partnership to work together to implement the reforms needed to prevent further violence and instability in the country and stand ready to assist where appropriate.
	We have provided funding for Kofi Annan's secretariat in Nairobi and support to the Waki and Kriegler commissions. My right honourable friend the Prime Minister wrote to President Kibaki and Prime Minister Odinga on 9 April 2009 to relay our concerns at the slow pace of reform and to encourage them to intensify their efforts to deliver. The Prime Minister highlighted the need to tackle the culture of impunity and to hold to account those responsible for the post-election violence, as recommended by Justice Waki.
	We are also encouraging and exploring opportunities for police reform with the Ministry of Internal Security, another crucial element of the Waki Commission report. We are also considering support for electoral reform.

Motorway Service Stations: Price Control

Lord Lester of Herne Hill: To ask Her Majesty's Government whether, as alleged by a spokesman for Moto in the Financial Times on 1 May, Government restrictions are imposed on motorway service station cafés and shops which prevent them from charging supermarket prices for food and drink.

Lord Adonis: The Government set no requirements regarding pricing structure for the services provided by motorways service area operators.
	The Department for Transport circular 1/2008, Policy on Service Areas and Other Roadside Facilities on Motorways and All-Purpose Trunk Roads in England, sets requirements for the provision, standards and signing of roadside facilities on the strategic road network. These include, for example, the provision of two hours' free parking for all types of vehicle, provision of free toilets, 24-hour opening and the availability of fuel.

Motorway Service Stations: Price Control

Lord Lester of Herne Hill: To ask Her Majesty's Government whether they will ensure that motorway service station cafés and shops do not charge excessive prices for basic food and drink.

Lord Adonis: Since 1992, government policy has been that the private sector should identify, build and operate motorway service areas (MSAs). Through the Highways Agency, the Government continue to have an involvement in MSAs in relation to road safety and traffic management but has no power to control pricing structures at MSAs as they are run as commercial operations by the private sector.

Northern Ireland Office: Bonuses

Lord Laird: To ask Her Majesty's Government further to the Written Answer by Baroness Royall of Blaisdon on 30 March (WA 198) and 24 April (WA 421) concerning bonuses for staff in the Northern Ireland Office, what assessment they have made of the extent to which the Answers provided were appropriate for the Questions.

Baroness Royall of Blaisdon: The Northern Ireland Office attaches considerable importance to answering Parliamentary Questions. All answers to Parliamentary Questions are cleared by a senior civil servant before being considered by Ministers.

Northern Ireland Office: Sick Leave

Lord Laird: To ask Her Majesty's Government whether there is an annual number of days allowed to staff of the Northern Ireland Office as sick leave; if so, how many days; when it was introduced; and what are the conditions for taking sick leave.

Baroness Royall of Blaisdon: There is no such entitlement.

Northern Ireland Office: Sick Leave

Lord Laird: To ask Her Majesty's Government how many members of staff of the Northern Ireland Office are currently off work on long-term sick leave; and how many of that number claim to be suffering from stress.

Baroness Royall of Blaisdon: Our records show that there are 40 members of staff in the Northern Ireland Office absent on long-term sick absence.
	In nine cases, anxiety/stress/depression/other psychiatric illness is the medically certified reason for the sickness absence.

Northern Ireland Office: Staff

Lord Laird: To ask Her Majesty's Government how many substitute staff were employed by the Northern Ireland Office in the past three years; what the cost in salaries and administration was; and whether they will consider creating permanent posts as a cost-saving alternative.

Baroness Royall of Blaisdon: In the last three years, April 2006 to March 2009, 398 substitute staff have been employed by the Northern Ireland Office and its agencies. The cost in salaries and administration was £4,647,116.
	Substitute staff have been employed to provide cover for a range of business needs which have included cover for maternity leave, sickness absence, recruitment delays and where substitute staff have the relevant experience or qualifications to carry out the job in the short term.
	The transient nature of these business needs means that the creation of permanent posts to fill the need is not always a cost-saving alternative.

Northern Ireland Office: Taxis

Lord Laird: To ask Her Majesty's Government how much was claimed by staff in the Northern Ireland Office on taxis in each month of 2008.

Baroness Royall of Blaisdon: Staff may claim taxi expenses for non pre-booked journeys which are approved by line managers in accordance with the departmental travel policy. These are reimbursed through staff expenses claims and are recorded as incidental expenditure on the departmental finance system.
	Extracting the information requested would require a manual investigation of all the claims for this period. These costs cannot be provided except at disproportionate cost.

Northern Ireland Office: Taxis

Lord Laird: To ask Her Majesty's Government further to the Written Answer by Baroness Royall of Blaisdon on 30 April (WA 72) which indicated that the Answer to a previous Question was incorrect, why the error was only acknowledged when the later question was tabled.

Baroness Royall of Blaisdon: The department was in the process of considering how best to deal with the error when Question HL3045 (Official Report, WA 72) was tabled.

Pakistani Christians

Lord Greaves: To ask Her Majesty's Government why the research and report on the Pakistani Muslim Community in England commissioned by Communities and Local Government from the Change Institute does not include the United Kingdom Pakistani Christian communities; and whether they propose to commission similar research into them.

Baroness Andrews: Communities and Local Government commissioned research into 13 Muslim ethnic communities in England in order to improve our understanding of the diversity which exists within, and is often masked by, the blanket term "British Muslim". For this reason populations of a relevant ethnicity but different faith—such as Pakistani Christian, Egyptian Coptic Christian and Indian Sikh—were acknowledged but deemed outside the scope of the research. There are no immediate plans to produce further reports on other communities.

Presbyterian Mutual Society of Northern Ireland

Lord Alton of Liverpool: To ask Her Majesty's Government what consideration they are giving to the situation of savers who have deposited funds with the Presbyterian Mutual Society of Northern Ireland; and what action is being taken to protect those savings.

Lord Myners: The Government sympathise with the difficult situation faced by members of the Presbyterian Mutual Society of Northern Ireland. Organisations such as the PMS which are registered as industrial and provident societies (IPSs) are exempt from regulation by the Financial Services Authority (FSA) in respect of accepting deposits in the form of withdrawable share capital. Societies should make clear to members that their deposits are risk capital, held in the form of share capital that can be withdrawn. Under IPS legislation, any one member's shareholding is limited to £20,000. Being outside of FSA regulation, the PMS and its members do not contribute to, and are therefore not protected by, the Financial Services Compensation Scheme (FSCS).

Questions for Written Answer: Late Answers

Lord Laird: To ask Her Majesty's Government when they will answer questions HL1594, HL1595 and HL1597, tabled on 23 February; and what is the reason for the delay.

Baroness Royall of Blaisdon: I apologise for the delay. Naturally I asked for the delay to be investigated. I regret that there is no clear reason other than inefficiency. Every effort will be made to ensure that such delays will not occur in future.
	These Questions have now been answered (Official Report, 28 April, col. WA 32).

Schools: Performance Tables

Lord Lucas: To ask Her Majesty's Government further to the Written Answer by Baroness Morgan of Drefelin on 20 April (WA 370), why they do not rely on the work of UCAS to judge the compatibility of IGCSE and GCSE; why the inclusion of a qualification in school performance tables should be subject to it meeting the requirement for public funding; and what elements of the "priority aspects of learning in English and Mathematics" are not included in the relevant IGCSE.

Baroness Morgan of Drefelin: The school and college achievement and attainment tables provide a reliable source of comparative information to help focus the debate on standards and strengthen the accountability of schools and colleges. It follows that the indicators of performance at the end of key stage 4 must be based on performance in comparable examinations. This means that for inclusion in the tables qualifications must first be accredited by Ofqual as meeting certain standards and be subject to regulation to ensure those standards are maintained. International GCSEs (iGCSEs) have not been submitted to Ofqual for accreditation by the awarding bodies concerned and so cannot be considered for inclusion in the tables.
	Once accredited, qualifications for use in maintained schools must also be approved for funding under Section 96 of the Learning and Skills Act 2000. The achievement and attainment tables only recognise qualifications which have been approved under Section 96 because it is unlawful for maintained schools to offer other qualifications. While independent schools can legally offer qualifications which are not approved under Section 96, these are not recognised in the tables because to do so would mean that the tables would not be comparing performance across a common set of qualifications.
	In the key performance indicator showing the number of pupils achieving five A*-C GCSEs or equivalent, including GCSEs in English and mathematics, we specify GCSEs in these core subjects because they have been accredited by Ofqual as meeting the statutory requirements of the national curriculum. Ofqual has not determined whether iGCSEs meet these requirements because they have not been submitted for accreditation. However, the Qualifications and Curriculum Authority (QCA) conducted a comparability study into the extent to which iGCSEs met GCSE criteria and corresponding programmes of study required for use in England, the results of which are available on Ofqual's website at www.ofqual.gov.uk/309.aspx. This found that, for example, the iGCSE in English literature includes no prescribed reading to meet the requirement to study Shakespeare.
	The QCA is responsible for the methodology for establishing the relative value of qualifications reported in the achievement and attainment tables and the points awarded to those qualifications. Their system was designed as a measure of a school's effort and effectiveness in teaching these qualifications. UCAS's system, on the other hand, was designed as a measure of students' preparedness for higher education.

Sport: Swimming

Baroness Coussins: To ask Her Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of having dual awarding bodies for the teaching of swimming.

Lord Carter of Barnes: There is nothing to prevent more than one awarding body from delivering accredited qualifications for the teaching of swimming.
	The Qualifications and Curriculum Authority is responsible for the status of awarding bodies. Currently, both the Amateur Swimming Association and the Swimming Teachers' Association are approved as awarding bodies for offering qualifications for the teaching of swimming.

Treaties: Parliamentary Scrutiny

Lord Lester of Herne Hill: To ask Her Majesty's Government further to the comments by Lord McKenzie of Luton on 28 April (Official Report, House of Lords, GC 41), whether they will support the introduction of procedures for enhanced parliamentary scrutiny of treaties without the need for legislation; and, if not, what are their reasons.

Lord Malloch-Brown: As the noble Lord, Lord McKenzie of Luton, stated on 28 April 2009, the Constitutional Renewal Bill is scheduled for introduction before the Summer Recess. The Bill will include provisions to place the present arrangements for parliamentary scrutiny of treaties on a statutory footing.
	The development and operation of mechanisms outside the proposed legislation to enhance Parliament's ability to scrutinise treaties is ultimately a matter for Parliament itself. The Government will endeavour to respond positively to whichever additional methods Parliament wishes to pursue.

Visas

Baroness Hooper: To ask Her Majesty's Government whether any complaints have been received about the regional administration of visa applications made overseas; if so, how many; and what steps are being taken to monitor and review the system.

Lord West of Spithead: In April 2008 we appointed regional directors to run the business of the UK Border Agency's international group, including the visa service, through the following regions: Africa, the Americas, Asia-Pacific, Euromed and South Asia and the Gulf. No complaints have been received about this restructuring.